I wrote this column for my Free Picks page (http://www.madjacksports.com/nick.shtml). I really think that this is a worthwhile concept for handicappers to consider whether they ultimately agree or disagree with it. As always any comments or questions are greatly appreciated.
-Nick
BREVITY IS THE SOUL OF WINNING
by Nick Douglas
nick_douglas@mac.com
Blaise Pascal once wrote a long, drawn out letter to a friend, and then in the postscript apologized for not having time to write a shorter one. While Pascal?s understanding of both the importance and difficulty of brevity most specifically applies to storytelling, speeches and writing, this principle applies to gambling as well.
On any given day, the gambler is given a myriad of wagering options. Sides, totals, haltimes, parlays, teasers and props are all available on each of the thousands of wagerable games each year.
Given ample research time, the successful gambler should aspire not to select as many plays as possible, but as few as possible. Every wager can be justified if enough research is done, but plays with true value against the line that yield large margin gains over the long term are relatively rare.
When a handicapper sits down with their full two, four, eight or however many hours are devoted to researching sports wagers per day, the goal should not be to uncover as many plays as possible. Theoretically, that method yields an infinite number of plays as long as the time allotted for research lengthens. All handicappers know that placing too many wagers is a common mistake which illustrates the flaws in this common method of game selection.
Rather than expanding the number of plays as more time is devoted to research, the gamblers should strive to lower his number of plays over time. Given infinite time, I submit that a gambler would be more successful if he looked for reasons to eliminate plays rather than to add them.
A real life example might play out along these lines. A gambler first realizes how much time they have to handicap a certain day?s games. Given that amount of time, they then judge realistically what range of games they are capable of handicapping. For instance, if an NFL bettor finds themselves with less time than normal to handicap an average Sunday?s games, they might pass on props or totals for a week and concentrate solely on sides.
Once it is decided what range of games the handicapper is looking at, the process focuses on finding reasons to *pass* games rather than reasons to *play* games. At the end of the allotted amount of time for that day, the few plays that are left would have gone through such intense scrutiny that their value in comparison to the betting line should be at an abolute peak.
I realize that this line of thinking goes against a widely accepted handicapping principle. I know that most handicappers, from the seasoned to the novice, look to find as many games as possible with true value in a given day if enough time is available. I just look at results, both from myself and other notable handicappers on this board, and I see that the principle of brevity applies to handicapping.
If you are a beginner, a struggling handicapper or even a successful handicapper who just wants to experiment with something new, try the concept of taking extra hours to reduce your number of plays rather than adding to them. In most any area of life, brevity is part of greatness. I believe that this concept applies to winning handicapping as well.
-Nick
BREVITY IS THE SOUL OF WINNING
by Nick Douglas
nick_douglas@mac.com
Blaise Pascal once wrote a long, drawn out letter to a friend, and then in the postscript apologized for not having time to write a shorter one. While Pascal?s understanding of both the importance and difficulty of brevity most specifically applies to storytelling, speeches and writing, this principle applies to gambling as well.
On any given day, the gambler is given a myriad of wagering options. Sides, totals, haltimes, parlays, teasers and props are all available on each of the thousands of wagerable games each year.
Given ample research time, the successful gambler should aspire not to select as many plays as possible, but as few as possible. Every wager can be justified if enough research is done, but plays with true value against the line that yield large margin gains over the long term are relatively rare.
When a handicapper sits down with their full two, four, eight or however many hours are devoted to researching sports wagers per day, the goal should not be to uncover as many plays as possible. Theoretically, that method yields an infinite number of plays as long as the time allotted for research lengthens. All handicappers know that placing too many wagers is a common mistake which illustrates the flaws in this common method of game selection.
Rather than expanding the number of plays as more time is devoted to research, the gamblers should strive to lower his number of plays over time. Given infinite time, I submit that a gambler would be more successful if he looked for reasons to eliminate plays rather than to add them.
A real life example might play out along these lines. A gambler first realizes how much time they have to handicap a certain day?s games. Given that amount of time, they then judge realistically what range of games they are capable of handicapping. For instance, if an NFL bettor finds themselves with less time than normal to handicap an average Sunday?s games, they might pass on props or totals for a week and concentrate solely on sides.
Once it is decided what range of games the handicapper is looking at, the process focuses on finding reasons to *pass* games rather than reasons to *play* games. At the end of the allotted amount of time for that day, the few plays that are left would have gone through such intense scrutiny that their value in comparison to the betting line should be at an abolute peak.
I realize that this line of thinking goes against a widely accepted handicapping principle. I know that most handicappers, from the seasoned to the novice, look to find as many games as possible with true value in a given day if enough time is available. I just look at results, both from myself and other notable handicappers on this board, and I see that the principle of brevity applies to handicapping.
If you are a beginner, a struggling handicapper or even a successful handicapper who just wants to experiment with something new, try the concept of taking extra hours to reduce your number of plays rather than adding to them. In most any area of life, brevity is part of greatness. I believe that this concept applies to winning handicapping as well.
